ModuleImport

John Barton johnjbarton at google.com
Fri Jun 27 07:00:30 PDT 2014


+1


On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Matthew Robb <matthewwrobb at gmail.com>
wrote:

> My opinion is that CommonJS and AMD work today and will continue to work
> into the future so we should optimize for the ideal "looking forward, not
> backward" case when adding to the language. Loader will still be
> overload-able and since both CommonJS and AMD require a library today it
> seems completely reasonable that they will continue to do that and can hook
> into es6 through loader extension.
>
> Conclusions:
> - Drop default exports
> - export function readFile(){}
> - import fs from "es6-fs"; // fs.readfile();
> - import { readFile } from "es6-fs"; // readFile();
> - Done.
>
>
> - Matthew Robb
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:32 AM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>   - Either we think "real" modules are an improvement, and checking is
>>> important. Then the model and the syntax should be consistent about
>>> that. Moreover, checking needs to consistently apply, no matter how a
>>> module and its components are defined or accessed.
>>>
>>>   - Or we come to the conclusion that supporting the legacy singleton
>>> export model as a primary use case is a mandatory matter. Then we
>>> should drop attempts of building something in/semi-compatible, and
>>> limit innovation to making export and import declarative, and
>>> designing a loader API.
>>>
>>
>> Since "real" modules are at the core of the current design, I think the
>> first option is feasible and equates to simply dropping the "default"
>> feature, leaving everything else intact.  The second option, on the other
>> hand, will take us back to the drawing board and I don't see how we can do
>> that within the ES6 timeline.  We don't want Promises all over again.
>>
>> So, if we cannot settle on option 1, then I think modules must be
>> deferred from ES6.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140627/21ade511/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list